Alpha-emitters for prostate bone met?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

honger

Charlie Brown
10+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2010
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
http://www.esmo.org/events/milan-20...1216&tx_ttnews[backPid]=2135&cHash=698708a583

24.09.11
Category: EMCC 2011
Until recently, options for patients with bone metastases from advanced prostate cancer have been very limited. But now the first Phase III study of an alpha-pharmaceutical in these patients has shown that it can prolong survival significantly.

Dr. Chris Parker, Consultant Clinical Oncologist at the Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK, told the congress that the ALSYMPCA international Phase III study of the drug Radium-223 Chloride (Alpharadin TM) in 922 prostate cancer patients who were resistant to hormone treatment and had bone metastases, had been stopped early once an interim analysis by the Independent Data Monitoring Committee (IDMC) in June 2011 had revealed that patients receiving the best standard treatment plus radium-223 were living longer than those who were receiving the same standard treatment plus placebo. The hazard ratio was 0.695, (p = 0.00185), meaning that patients taking radium-223 had a 30% lower rate of death compared to patients taking placebo. Median overall survival for patients taking radium-223 was found to be 14 months, compared with 11.2 months in the placebo group. "It would have been unethical not to offer the active treatment to those taking placebo," Dr. Parker said.

Alpha-pharmaceuticals work by delivering minute, highly charged and targeted doses of damaging radiation to a secondary tumour (metastasis) in the bone. Radium is similar to calcium in that it sticks to bone, and particularly to where new bone is being formed, so it is a highly effective way of delivering radiation to a target. "It takes only a single alpha particle to kill a cell," Dr. Parker explained, "and collateral damage is minimised because the particles have such a tiny range – a few millionths of a metre (micrometres). So we can be sure that the damage is being done where it should be, to the metastasis, and very limited elsewhere."

The researchers chose to study the drug in patients with prostate cancer because of its high tendency to metastasise to bone. Around 90% of all men with prostate cancer will develop bone metastases in the advanced stage, and in many cases there are not detectable metastases elsewhere in the body. The safety profile of radium-223 was found to be highly favourable, the researchers say.

"Compared to chemotherapy, which affects all the tissues of the body, radium-223 is highly targeted to the bone metastases, and it has a completely different safety profile," said Dr Parker.

Side effects with radium-223 are minor. It can cause nausea, and occasional loose bowel movements, and there is a very small effect on the bone marrow. "Although it has never been rigorously compared with chemotherapy, from observing patients in the clinic it is clear that patients tolerate it much better than they do chemotherapy," Dr. Parker said.

The researchers now intend to submit the data for regulatory approval. "I would hope that the authorities will approve radium-223 as a treatment for bone metastases in advanced prostate cancer soon," said Dr. Parker. "This is a common cancer – the second commonest cancer killer in men in the UK – and so it's a big disease burden. We urgently need effective treatment for it.

"I have no doubt that there will be further trials looking at a combination of radium-223 with other drugs that are currently used in prostate cancer, and that there will also be studies using radium earlier in the disease. In particular, our research was restricted to those men who were not going to receive chemotherapy for prostate cancer. It would be interesting to use radium-223 chloride before chemotherapy, since it might be even more effective in that setting.

"Additionally, the drug could be used in many other types of cancers which metastasise to bone, regardless of the primary site. We believe that our trial may have paved the way for improvements in survival for very many cancer patients," he concluded.

Saw this in the popular press, thought you guys might find it interesting. Supposedly the compound is a calcium mimetic and should work well in blastic lesions. Would this fall under the purview of radonc?
 
Saw this in the popular press, thought you guys might find it interesting. Supposedly the compound is a calcium mimetic and should work well in blastic lesions. Would this fall under the purview of radonc?

Very interesting study, thanks for sharing.

There is high regional variability in who delivers radioisotopes (Rad Onc vs Nuc Med).
 
I would literally have to bring a gun to tumor board to get my med oncs to let me give a radiopharmaceutical to a patient. The handgun laws are now favorable in the DC area, so with this data, I may be able to prescribe Quadramet once in a while, but for whatever reason, the current response is similar to as if I had suggested, "Hey, how about we bring the leeches to this guy?"

I say Quadramet, because I presume the same outcome - I believe there is a trial going on. It's clearly an economic issue, because we have the same issues for Zevalin and similar meds. If it's injectable, the med onc wants to bill for it. If they can't, they won't let anyone else inject anything.

Irony is, we don't have the ability to bill for it or make even a dime due to local insurers, but I continue to try...

S

Very interesting study, thanks for sharing.

There is high regional variability in who delivers radioisotopes (Rad Onc vs Nuc Med).
 
I would literally have to bring a gun to tumor board to get my med oncs to let me give a radiopharmaceutical to a patient. The handgun laws are now favorable in the DC area, so with this data, I may be able to prescribe Quadramet once in a while, but for whatever reason, the current response is similar to as if I had suggested, "Hey, how about we bring the leeches to this guy?"

I say Quadramet, because I presume the same outcome - I believe there is a trial going on. It's clearly an economic issue, because we have the same issues for Zevalin and similar meds. If it's injectable, the med onc wants to bill for it. If they can't, they won't let anyone else inject anything.

Irony is, we don't have the ability to bill for it or make even a dime due to local insurers, but I continue to try...

S

Must be a geographic thing. Some of the med oncs I've worked with have referred specifically for Quadramet
 
Maybe the real world isn't quite as rosy as the trial?

Just ran across this interesting observation:

A Single-center Retrospective Analysis of the Effect of Radium-223 (Xofigo) on Pancytopenia in Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer

DOI: 10.7759/cureus.6806

William P. Skelton IV 1 , Samantha W. Dibenedetto Barish 2 , Adaeze Nwosu-Iheme 3 , Long Dang 4 2, Shiyi S. Pang 2, Kelsey Pan 2, Jacob L.

1. Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center University of South Florida, Tampa, USA 2. Internal Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA 3. Oncology, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA 4. Oncology, Ochsner Health System, Baton Rouge, USA

Introduction

Radium-223 (Xofigo, Bayer Pharmaceuticals Inc., Whippany, NJ) has been shown to increase overall survival in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), via the phase 3 ALpharadin in SYMPtomatic Prostate CAncer (ASLYMPCA) study. Hematologic side effects of radium-223 included all-grade anemia in 31% of the patients, thrombocytopenia in 12%, and neutropenia in 5%, and persistent pancytopenia noted in 2%. However, the incidence seen in our institutional clinical practice is higher than that reported in the literature.

Results

Twenty-three patients received Xofigo at UF Health, and one was lost to follow-up. Sixteen patients (73%) completed the full course (six doses) of Xofigo, while six did not. Ten patients (45%) developed pancytopenia, with two recovering counts within eight months while the other eight had persistent cytopenias (six of which were transfusion-dependent). Older age and higher ECOG score correlated with increased risk of pancytopenia. In addition, a higher percentage of patients who received prior radiation therapy were more likely to develop pancytopenia (90% vs 75%).
 
That has not been my experience with Ra-223
 
I've had a couple with that issue, but basically they had been heavily pre treated with taxotere, jevtana etc so marrow was probably teetering on the edge even though the counts were ok before we started

That's what I was going to say. At a single institution like this, I'm guessing they were heavily pretreated and sent for Ra-223 as a last resort.
 
I have also seen a patient with persistent cytopenia following Radium 223.

I suspect that PSMA-therapy is now going to heavily substitute this treatment.
 
Wish they would run a head to head trial. Never going to happen of course. Lu-177 from a physics perspective is much less elegant than radium. Psma-Lu may have more biologic specificity but from a physics standpoint its decay is more complex and involves photons as well. A dosimetric comparison would be interesting. A targeted alpha emitter would be the holy grail.
 
Wish they would run a head to head trial. Never going to happen of course. Lu-177 from a physics perspective is much less elegant than radium. Psma-Lu may have more biologic specificity but from a physics standpoint its decay is more complex and involves photons as well. A dosimetric comparison would be interesting. A targeted alpha emitter would be the holy grail.
Ac225 is the next gen for lutetium based theranostics.
 
Top